Because, Canada

[Murph]

11 minutes ago, R011 said:

Actually it was Quebec provincial police, not Montreal municipal police.  They advise victims to call 911 with evidence instead as it would not subject posters to any legal liability for possible defamation.  This isn't a prohibition and they would have no way to enforce this as a policy.

Thank you for clarity.  It just seemed so over the top.

[Murph]

More on that, apparently it is real.  Don't violate those poor criminals rights.

 

 

[Colin]

18 hours ago, Murph said:

More on that, apparently it is real.  Don't violate those poor criminals rights.

 

18 hours ago, Murph said:

 

 

Several lawyers have derided him and I know a number of police officers who think he is full of shit. 

 

Edited January 14, 2024 by Colin

[Colin]

Now this is real and problem. Even some of the Left Wing are complaining about this arrest.

 

 

 

[R011]

On 1/13/2024 at 1:47 PM, Murph said:

More on that, apparently it is real.  Don't violate those poor criminals rights.

 

 

Do note that if defamation charges were to be laid, they'd be civil suits by alleged porch pirates, not criminal charges by police.  Police have nothing to do with private citizens suing other private citizens.  Mind you,it does seem like he's giving legal advice well outside his area of expertise and I see it's probably not good advice.

[R011]

17 hours ago, Colin said:

Now this is real and problem. Even some of the Left Wing are complaining about this arrest.

 

 

 

I have to disagree with the narrator.  You can see in the slowed down version that he saw the cop and would have been able to see he was going to walk into him.  The cop could have got out of the way, but he doesn't have to.

[Tim Sielbeck]

18 minutes ago, R011 said:

I have to disagree with the narrator.  You can see in the slowed down version that he saw the cop and would have been able to see he was going to walk into him.  The cop could have got out of the way, but he doesn't have to.

Or he saw the "gentleman" and saw that the "gentleman" was not in his way and was surprised when the "gentleman" moved to impede his path.  You can see in the afore mentioned slowed down part that the "gentleman" was in fact moving forward and to his right, intercepting Menzies as he tried to pass by.

[Murph]

9 hours ago, R011 said:

Do note that if defamation charges were to be laid, they'd be civil suits by alleged porch pirates, not criminal charges by police.  Police have nothing to do with private citizens suing other private citizens.  Mind you,it does seem like he's giving legal advice well outside his area of expertise and I see it's probably not good advice.

I completely agree, cops should never give legal advice. I never did, that is a fast way to get sued.

[DB]

The only potential kernel of truth may be that publicising the crime may be prejudicial to a prosecution by "contaminating" potential jurors, but in the end you putting a video on YouTube is no different to the local news showing the same thing.

[R011]

6 hours ago, DB said:

The only potential kernel of truth may be that publicising the crime may be prejudicial to a prosecution by "contaminating" potential jurors, but in the end you putting a video on YouTube is no different to the local news showing the same thing.

Some cops want a complete monopoly on matters of crime.  They prefer that victims be compliant rather than fight back.  Sometimes that's the right way to go and sometimes it isn't.

[Murph]

Holy SH*T! Is this real?  OMFG, this is bad, I really feel sorry for the normal people in Canada!

 

 

[Murph]

Well, are there any consequences?  In the US there would not be if it was a Democrat doing this:

 

 

[R011]

5 hours ago, Murph said:

Holy SH*T! Is this real?  OMFG, this is bad, I really feel sorry for the normal people in Canada!

 

 

If by real you mean is this Trudeau? No.

 

5 hours ago, Murph said:

Holy SH*T! Is this real?  OMFG, this is bad, I really feel sorry for the normal people in Canada!

 

 

If you mean is this Trudeau?  No, it isn't.  Is it some guy in '80s hair and clothes dancing?  Looks like it.

[R011]

5 hours ago, Murph said:

Well, are there any consequences?  In the US there would not be if it was a Democrat doing this:

 

 

I wouldn't take the commentary by the Federal Conservative Party Leader as anything but partisan rhetoric.  The ruling, which is being appealed, says that this should have been handled by local authorities, not that the actions themselves were necessarily unjust per se.

[Murph]

14 hours ago, R011 said:

If by real you mean is this Trudeau? No.

 

If you mean is this Trudeau?  No, it isn't.  Is it some guy in '80s hair and clothes dancing?  Looks like it.

Ok, thanks for that, it looked like him.  I thought it was bizarre even for Canada. Also I was not sure if the guy commenting on the Trucker ruling was a politician or a media type.

[rmgill]

 

[Colin]

On 1/24/2024 at 7:59 AM, Murph said:

Ok, thanks for that, it looked like him.  I thought it was bizarre even for Canada. Also I was not sure if the guy commenting on the Trucker ruling was a politician or a media type.

It will be appealed, but I am struggling on what the grounds for appeal will be? It will has to go through the Court of Appeals and then if allowed it will then go to the Supreme Court. It is a major slap on the face of this government and it's telling that both the father and the son have used this power in their terms.

 

Edited January 28, 2024 by Colin

[Ivanhoe]

[Murph]

Uh, Canada, WTF?

 

 

[Murph]

Did not the Nazi's do this under the T4 program?  Is Trudeau going to set up camps?

[Ivanhoe]

4 hours ago, Murph said:

Uh, Canada, WTF?

 

 

 

4 hours ago, Murph said:

Did not the Nazi's do this under the T4 program?  Is Trudeau going to set up camps?

"Camps" is such a 20th century term. They'll come up with "Rainbow Bridge Resorts" or some such.

 

[Mikel2]

9 hours ago, Murph said:

Uh, Canada, WTF?

 

 

Did they call it Aktion T4 too?

[R011]

This explains the proposal in more detail than a somewhat sensationalist headline does:

https://www.camh.ca/en/camh-news-and-stories/maid-and-mental-illness-faqs

It doesn't seem to involve some functionary simply deciding to euthanize a patient on a whim.

 

[rmgill]

No. But it does include a very short path from ‘I am depressed’ to ‘Here, let us help you commit suicide’ 

[Wobbly Head]

There is some hope for Canada.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.7101595

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith says her government will introduce legislation this fall to support the planned policy changes affecting transgender and non-binary youth and adults.

 

 

Among the measures:

Top and bottom surgeries will be banned for minors aged 17 and under. Doctors say bottom surgeries aren't performed on youth and top surgeries are rare.

Puberty blockers and hormone therapies for gender affirmation will not be permitted for children aged 15 and under.

Youths aged 16 and 17 will be permitted to start hormone therapies for gender affirmation "as long as they are deemed mature enough" and have parental, physician and psychologist approval.

Parental notification and consent will be required for a school to alter the name or pronouns of any child under age 15. Students who are 16 or 17 won't need permission but schools will need to let their parents know first.

Parents will have to "opt-in" their children every time a teacher plans to teach about gender identity, sexual orientation or sexuality. Alberta law currently requires parental notification and gives them the option to opt students out.

All third-party teaching materials on gender identity, sexual orientation or sexuality will need to be approved in advance by the education ministry.

Transgender women will be banned from competing in women's sports leagues. Smith said the government will work with leagues to set up coed or gender-neutral divisions for sports.

 

Needless to say the left have lost their s#$t.